First Of 2 Trials Involving Concord Police Officer Accused Of Assaulting Suspects Underway

CONCORD, NH — A jury has been selected in what is expected to be a two-day trial involving a Concord police officer, who has been on paid leave since mid-2023, accused of assaulting resisting arrest suspects.

Concord Police Officer Richard Cobb, 41, of Prescott Valley, Arizona, was placed on unpaid leave in May 2023 after he was accused of assaulting a man and a woman during two different incidents in March and April 2023.

In the first case, Cobb was accused of unprivileged contact with Blake Andrew Thomas-Haney, 38, a transient from Texas, who was reportedly drifting through Concord in Spring 2023. He was accused of assaulting Thomas-Haney on a sidewalk and against a vehicle while outside of Sal’s Pizza on Storrs Street at around 7 p.m. on April 1, 2023. Thomas-Haney was later charged with possession of an alcoholic beverage on public property and resisting arrest or detention.

His arrest was not included in the police blotter Patch received on April 11, 2023, so his charges were not published at the time.

Also Read

• Witness Confuses Race Of Concord Officer At Sal’s Pizza Arrest Scene
• Former Concord Police Officer Indicted On Simple Assault Charges
• Pickup Truck Rolls On Iron Works Road In Concord: Watch

Cobb was indicted on the four charges in Spring 2024.

A second trial is expected to take place in March.

Eric Wilson of Wilson, Bush & Keefe of Nashua is representing Cobb, while Joe Fincham and Dan Jimenez are prosecutors from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office.

Judge Dan St. Hilaire presided over jury selection on Tuesday, noting to two potential jurors with hearing aids that the court was having some issues with audio, including headsets that were not working. He offered to dismiss those potential jurors automatically, but they both declined.

After introducing everyone involved with the case, as well as a list of witnesses — including current police officers, command staffers, and investigators, but did not appear to include the victim, St. Hilaire said it was essential to pick jurors who would be fair and impartial, reminding them the charges were not evidence of guilt. Cobb had “a presumption of innocence, beyond a reasonable doubt,” he said. St. Hilaire explained the principles of law, asked about conflicts of interest, whether any of the potential jurors had been victims of crime, and other issues.

One juror was a victim of an assault in Hopkinton, but it did not go to trial, he said. After discussing the incident with the attorneys, the man was seated. A woman and man were seated while another woman was requested to stay until all the jurors were seated before being excused. A steady flow of jurors was seated when one man was excused after a lengthy conversation with the judge and attorneys. Another man, who was accused of rape by his former spouse last year, was also seated after explaining the case was about child custody issues and the charges were dropped (the statement was confirmed later by Patch after a search of documents at the court after the jurors were chosen).

After more than a dozen men and women were seated, as well as alternates, the jurors were asked about what they did for fun in their free time as part of a process called voir dire. During this process, the prosecutors and defense attorney can analyze whether the jurors will be impartial based on their answers. The range of activities mentioned by the potential jurors included painting and photography to hiking, cooking, snowboarding, and watching sports. Several said they also spent time with family, with a few speaking about their grandchildren.

Jurors were then asked if they had ever encountered anyone who was intoxicated and asked for traits they witnessed during those interactions. One person said slurred speech while another said stumbling. Incoherence and red eyes were also noted.

Jurors were also asked if they had ever tried to get someone who was intoxicated to do something and what traits of homeless people they had seen or heard about. The jurors said delusions or delusional statements, panhandling, smoking meth, and speaking loudly. Another said they attended an event at the Friendly Kitchen with a religious group and expressed negativity about the occasion, saying it was a “superficial interaction” and was all about delivering free items to the homeless.

Wilson then followed up with questioning about intoxicated people and asked for descriptions of them and how they would handle the situation. One woman said they would try to get help. How?, Wilson asked. By calling the police, she said. One potential juror said even if a homeless person were belligerent, they should be treated respectfully.

The attorney asked for negative or positive interaction with the police, but few said anything. They were then asked when they thought using physical force during a case was appropriate but did not mention much by way of information.

After the questioning, the defense and prosecution were supposed to review who to keep to serve and who to remove. But one woman asked to approach the judge to speak about an issue. After three minutes, she stepped aside, and the attorneys conferred briefly, and she was excused.

Another name was picked out of the can, and after a brief interview, that woman was seated.

Both prosecutors and the defense then removed three potential jurors, all men, including two young men who appeared to be in their 20s. This left a relatively even mix of men and women, all the men seemingly in their 40s or older, while the women ranged in age from mid-20s to late 40s.

The trial will restart on Wednesday afternoon and run until Thursday.

Do you have a news tip? Please email it to tony.schinella@patch.com. View videos on Tony Schinella's YouTube.com channel or Rumble.com channel. Follow the NH politics Twitter account @NHPatchPolitics for all our campaign coverage.